KiloAlpha

So I am guessing that you have no college education.

SkyHigh

I do have real world experience. I think that pilots today think they have experience but really have nothing much. In the world of today a 19 year old kid can get a job as a regional FO and probably will upgrade before his 24th birthday. There is no way there is any experience there. True life and flight experience is not required anymore. Basic IFR instrument skills are a thing of the past. Kids today hover over the flight computer and always have the autopilot engaged. Decisions on diverting or maintenance are all made on the ground. Any skill that is required for X-wind (about the only thing left that requires anything resembling skills) can be slowly acquired. The modern airline pilot is an example of radio guided, manual programed, flow chart lead human automation. Training is reduced to the lowest common denominator. No thinking is required. If you want proof just read TSA-emb145-fo's post.

Fireman, If I recall you are retired? Have you ever flown some of the latest and greatest equipment? The planes of today are a whole lot different from the steam gauge paper approach days. Even a 767 is a dinosaur anymore.

SkyHigh

Blackhawk

I would disagree, and would also argue that some thing more dangerous than "Shiney Jet Syndrome" is something I would call "Pinnacle Syndrome" after the crash last year. Now before you pilots at Pinnacle get your panties in a wad, I see this syndrome at my regional as well.
"Pinnacle Syndrome" is where you get two low time, immature pilots together in a CAT D aircraft. It's a big game.
When I was hired at my regional seven years ago, my class of 16 all had pretty extensive flying backgrounds either as flight instructors, military pilots, 135/corporate pilots, or a mix. In my case I had 12 years of military flying including instructing, several years of civilian instructing, and six months of flying rubber checks by myself at night, in crappy weather, with no autopilot. All of us in my new hire class had felt the whisper of fate on our necks- either teaching some new student, flying tough military missions, or being pushed into bad weather by a demanding boss. Most of us had attended funerals for those who were not so lucky... fate is kind of finicky some times.
When I got to the line I do not remember flying with any captains who had less than 8 years experience at my airline, and none of them came there straight out of a flight school. Some were better than others, but all were safe, mature and conservative. They did not goof off in the aircraft. They did not view the barber pole as a goal rather than a limit as I have had some FOs say.
What we have now are pilots who have to wait for their 23rd birthday to upgrade being paired with 19 year olds straight out of the school. The lack of maturity, basic aviation knowledge and respect for that finicky hunter called fate among some of my FOs amazes me. Flying is a game and a big joke. A way to build time before they go Brown, Purple or get hired by SWA Netjet or what ever place they think will be more fun/lucrative. When I look in the cabin and see my kids, my wife, my mom or dad, they see a bunch of "lizards" who make flying a real hassle.
Some would say the Pinnacle crash was a training problem. Yeah, maybe they could have had more training. But I doubt it would have stopped them from over riding the stick pusher/shacker three times; or waiting until they were at 10,000' and out of time and options to tell ATC they actually had lost both engines, not one engine. There were SO MANY safe guards in place, and this crew over came every one of them. The only thing that would stop that is maturity and respect for flying that comes from years of experience and maybe attending an NTSB board for one of your friends.
We were lucky there were no passengers on this aircraft. But the next one- and unfortunately I think there will be a next one- we will not be so lucky.

freezingflyboy

I have to agree. As a "new guy" myself, I'm getting tired of being blamed for pay cuts that happened before my eyes ever turned skyward. If any of you old guys think I should "do the right thing" and turn down a job paying $50/hour because the pay for the same position 5 years ago was $60/hour you are fooling yourself. In the end we all are trying to improve our position with respect to pay and QOL. And if $50/hour is a pay increase from my current position then I am probably going to take it (assuming it is with an ethical company, etc).

To answer someone else's post, NUMBER of hours are becoming less important as far as the regionals are concerned. Instead QUALITY of hours are becoming the key. Any yutz can buy a 152 or a Seminole and fly around in the clear blue for 1500 hours and some would say he is better qualified than the 600 hour guy who flies in varied weather, hard IFR, icy runways, etc. I disagree.

LAfrequentflyer

Blackhawk...Thanks for your military service...

Excellent post and I believe you are right on target with your assessment...I have one question - what is a CAT D aircraft? I'll assume its a transport catagory jet aircraft. Am I close?

V/r,
LA

R1830toIAE2500

I have never singled out a specific individual on this or any other web board, but, I feel I must say this...SkyHigh, you are the biggest blow hard I have come across in years.

From what I can gather from your numerous posts, you came up to an airline that flew jet transport aircraft, for a cup of coffee, and got furloughed. Some where along the line you decided to change careers, or someone made the decision for you. Now you are an expert on anything and everything concerning the airline industry.

You pontificate as if your Charles Freaking Lindbergh on numerous subjects you know absolutely nothing about!

Regarding your most recent post on this thread, titled "Experience", you state that decisions regarding maintenance or diversions are "all made on the ground". To me, this exemplifies why you are no longer an airline pilot. In all my years of flying, I don't know of any Captain that would relinquish control of his/her aircraft to personel on the ground, ie: dispatch, to make flight related decisions. If you had ever flown for a part 121 scheduled air carrier, you would know that the Captain and the dispatcher have a shared authority regarding the operation of the flight. The Captain MUST contact dispatch in the event of a diversion. In most cases the PILOTs have already made the DECISION, they are merely advising dispatch and/or inquiring whether they would prefer a specific airport for secondary reasons such as fuel costs, ground handling, passenger convenience etc...

Regarding automation and the lack of instrument flying skills required in todays aircraft. As usual, you fail to mention specifics, but give your "expert" opinion on the subject, in a broad, all encompassing statement from "The world according to SkyHigh". Yes, todays aircraft are much more automated than previous generation air transports, but no true PILOT will let their basic flying skills degrade to the level you state. It is still required to fly a single engine (two engine aircraft) ILS, hand flown, on every PC or Type ride, and it is the PILOTs responsibility to maintain basic instrument proficiency, by flying without the automation, enough to do so.

Regarding PILOT compensation, you are all over the board! On 12/09/05 you stated..."I was not fond of the 9 leg days, low pay..." and also, "...new pilots are insulted when I suggest that we should expect more." On 12/07/05 you wrote: "...ChrisH, I agree with you. Pilots are not under paid. I think there is alot of room left for pay to slide downwards." or on 11/15/05, "...if you force your companies to pay above what the market will bare then you will assure your eventual demise. You might ask your congressman to install a law (install a law???) that would fix pilot wages nationwide. Sounds like a form of regulation to me, which, judging by your posts, you are against. Yet on 11/22/05 you wrote "...It appears we have a rare example of a true old fashioned arrogant over paid airline pilot here." but two days later you wrote "...I have a growing family who need money and are not so excited about resurrecting the airline lifestyle for chump change." Finally, one last example. On 11/16/05 you wrote "... I think the future pay rates are absurd" but in the same post you stated "...I see thousands upon thousands of experienced and unemployed pilots who would do the same job as you for a third the price. (Sadly, myself included)".

Sybil would be a more appropriate moniker.

Punkpilot48

While your statement is true everyone could use more training. I dont think this was a training accident. As a young guy myself I tell you this is what I call Darwin's theory at work. Idiots WILL NOT survive.

Blackhawk

Sorry. All aircraft are broken down into approach catagories based upon their approach speed, A-E with A being the slowest (below 90 knots, if I remember correctly), CAT E being the fastest. CAT E is exclusively military aircraft (if anyone knows of a civilian CAT E aircraft, let me know). The CRJ/Challenger is one of the few civilian aircraft that is CAT D; most airliners you will fly on are CAT C (they have slower approach speeds).
So a CAT D aircraft is hot on the approach, and has little room for error.

Blackhawk

Yeah, it is Darwin's theory. Unfortunately, in the past most of these idiots were weeded out prior to hitting a jet transport aircraft. With what is going on today, they will be weeded out IN transport aircraft with a bunch of passengers on board- maybe even my family. This scares the @#$^ out of me.
When things work well (99.9% of the time), there will not be a problem. It is the .1% I am worried about. I read a recent article by an aviation phsycologist where he wrote that it takes about 10 years of constant flying for a pilot to become intuitive, to be able to quickly process information in stressful conditions. We now have guys who are captains in RJs after 4 years TOTAL flying experience, 0 time to captain in 4 years. This is just not enough time to learn the tough lessons and the respect that is needed in most cases.

pilotwifey

Just offering a non-pilot perspective of this issue: I just started reading these boards as my husband has just been hired at a regional airline. One thing that I see over and over on these boards is the older, more experienced pilots ranting and raving about the state of the industry and then blaming it on young, competitive new pilots. This is not a fraternity, its a profession, and its one of the very few that operate solely on senority instead of on skill level. I've been in enough court rooms, and worked with enough attorneys to have seen many older, experienced attys who are idiots, as well as new, young attorneys that are phenomenal attorneys. I can say the same thing for most professions, including carpenters, writers, actors, bus drivers, doctors, the list goes on. I'm sure if I took a survey of captains on these boards, I would find some who have flown with low hour pilots that were completely on the ball, and some who weren't. Lack of experience just doesn't always equate with lack of skill. Becoming a commercial pilot is a very long and expensive career path, is the solution to the airline industry problems really to make the path even longer and more expensive by requiring more experience? In my opinion, the industry should considered possible hiring and advancing on the basis of actual skill, and not just experience alone. Such a system would not only ensure that the most skilled pilots retained the most important positions in aviation, but would also breathe fresh air into the industry. History has shown that competition breeds progress, and I would love to see the older, experienced, and endlessly complaining pilots worried about a "newbie" competing with him for his position.

Also- hope my grammar and spelling is acceptable, didn't realize that you pilots were such sticklers for that sort of thing!